Talk: A good thing to happen

While one leading daily described the outcome of much debated Indo-Pakistan Foreign Secretaries talk in New Delhi on February 25 as "Meaningless talks end in meaningless way" another widely-read daily said the talk itself should give cheer to those seeking the normalisation of ties between the tw

While one leading daily described the outcome of much debated Indo-Pakistan Foreign Secretaries talk in New Delhi on February 25 as "Meaningless talks end in meaningless way" another widely-read daily said the talk itself should give cheer to those seeking the normalisation of ties between the two countries.

Dawn editorially said: The reality that Pakistan's and India's foreign secretaries have met should give cheer to those seeking the normalisation of ties between the two countries. While nothing concrete was officially agreed between the two sides, the very fact that the sides have met at the secretary level should be considered a good thing. But The Nation lamented in a report "Rather than doing something serious that might lead to the solution of the disputes between the two nuclear-armed South Asian states, India has handed over two more dossiers to Pakistan". The Nation said that Prime Ministers of Pakistan and India were likely to hold a meeting on 28th April following foreign secretary-level talks. A top-level source from Prime Minister Secretariat also confirmed this when contacted by this correspondent. However The News quoted India's Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao as saying "it was premature to say anything about Pak-India PMs' meeting".

Dawn editorial read: The key from here forward is devising a workable framework for the two sides to resolve their disputes. In truth, the present climate is nowhere close to achieving that goal - but for a dispute that has festered for over six decades, small beginnings should be embraced wholeheartedly.

What are those disputes? At the core remains Kashmir. India has tried over the decades to paper over the cracks of its purported 'ownership' of Jammu and Kashmir but the fact remains that the local population is indigenously - without the support of outside groups - opposed to the Indian state's alleged 'ownership' of the region. To this 'core' issue have been added the concerns over water and India's 'Cold Start' doctrine. For Pakistan there is a simple reality on both counts: when it comes to agriculture, more than 40 per cent of the labour force is employed in the sector, meaning that significant changes would impact on the very existence of tens of millions of Pakistanis; and when it comes to a doctrine that envisages 'rapid strikes' inside Pakistani territory, the obvious fear is that Pakistan may be forced to lower its nuclear threshold, making the spectre of a nuclear war more likely.

Don't keep relationship hostage to terrorismUnfortunately, when it comes to Pak-India relations, there is always a tendency to indulge in a blame game: India is not talking to Pakistan because it's stubborn; Pakistan is not talking to India because it won't entirely give up its ties to jihadi groups. And yet geography, history and military capabilities cannot alter the need for both countries to get along. Which of either the Indian or Pakistani imperatives will prevail? In truth, neither must. India must realise that it cannot keep relations with Pakistan hostage to incidents of terrorism.

On its part, Pakistan must realise that pretending it can be business as usual and as though recent incidents of serious violence ought to have no bearing on how ties between the two countries are affected must be discarded. If not quite as simple as 'giving peace a chance' the two countries must realise that the other remains a millstone around its neck: progress for either without peace with the other is not ultimately possible, and everything must be done to achieve it.

India engaged in game of double Another leading daily The News charged India with engaging in "double talk". In a report on the talks it said: No substantial progress was made during the secretary-level talks held between Pakistan and India here on Thursday, as India engaged in a game of doubletalk, saying one thing while meaning the other.

Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir, while talking to the Pakistani press at the Pakistan High Commission in the evening, said the gap between Pakistan and India was widening and he did not see any substantial progress in the talks.

When asked whether he had invited Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao to Islamabad for talks, he said there was no such proposal. "Pakistan has given some suggestions and India has also submitted proposals during the meeting but I told them that Pakistan wanted result-oriented and meaningful dialogue with India." There is no need of secretary-level talks if India remains stuck to its stand on outstanding issues, he added.

Describing the attitude of India as untenable, he said New Delhi was sticking to its stand on issues, including that of terrorism, while Pakistan wanted that this issue should not make talks hostage.

We must build climate of trustThe paper also quoted India's Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao as telling the media that both the countries were agreed to continue the talks in future. She said that India never closed the doors of talks but terrorism was the main hurdle in way of establishing sustainable peace between both the countries. She said that Afghanistan issue was not discussed in the talks while Kashmir issue came under discussion. "Pakistan asked India to resume the composite dialogue snapped by the Mumbai terror attack but New Delhi said the two countries first needed to build a climate of trust. They said we should resume the composite dialogue. Our response was that we certainly don't discount the achievements of the composite dialogue and its relevance," she said, adding: "But the time is not right [for it] because we need to create a climate of trust and confidence," she said.

Do You Like This Story? Awesome! Now share the story Too bad. Tell us what you didn't like in the comments